The Austin lefty-bots are defending their DUI heroes in the prosecutor's office by saying that the Travis County DA recused itself of the prosecution and it was taken over by Republicans who continued to push the case. Not sure how to respond to that, but I'm sure they are leaving out key facts.

Stop slackin', start packin'.
National Rifle Association Life Member; Gun Owners of America Member
"Live by G-d's law, or die by man's law."

It was better when an elected public official who was caught in a hideous lapse, like this drunk was, would resign in disgrace and the less said the better.

Governor Perry was caught trying to restore public integrity the only way he could, and instead of being ashamed and resigning, these communist hippies in Austin tried to get back at him with appallingly bogus charges that it took Criminal Appeals to put a stop to.

I wonder if abuse of process or malicious prosecution counts would be appropriate, or whether the Grand Jury indictment gives them an out.

Luckily, I have enough willpower to control the driving ambition that rages within me.

According to a story on FOX News, he spent more than $2 million for his defense lawyers.

Sorry. I miss read.

I would like to see DAs who file bogus and malicious charges disbarred, indicted, tried, convicted and jailed.

I am ok with this but where would you stop?
What do you do with the 1st judge that didn't throw out the case?

Good question and I think you know not a simple answer. I believe that judges have immunity. I am not sure about prosecutors.
I would think the 1st judge would have to base their decision on the law, not the facts of the case.
Getting a little off topic, but I can only think of one recent case where the DA was actually charged and removed for malicious prosecution.
I think it needs to happen more often.

tomneal wrote:Rick Perry is not the first person to spend a fortune defending against bogus charges.

It's not exactly gun related but I'd like to see three possible verdicts:

Guilty
Not Guilty
Innocent

If you are found Innocent, the District Attorney pays your defense bill.

I only have one quibble...... How are you to be "found innocent?"

The DA/AG has the burden of proving guilt. If he/she is unable to prove guilt, then you are by default not guilty. How do you upgrade that to proving innocence, and who has the burden for that proof - the defense or the prosecution? I'm willing to bet that no prosecutor will take the burden of proving innocence for the person he just tried to jail unless ordered to do so by a judge. And if he has to do it under compulsion, how good of a job is he going to do of it? And de-facto, "not guilty" IS "innocent". I would amend your last sentence to say that if you are found not-guilty, the DA pays your defense bill. And if you are guilty, you pay the state's bill. Loser pays would significantly reduce all kinds of litigation, in both the civil and criminal realms.

Give me Liberty, or I'll get up and get it myself.—Hookalakah Meshobbab
I don't carry because of the odds, I carry because of the stakes.—The Annoyed Boy